Chiefs would rather fight than work with Ottawa: Duncan

Senators grilled the Indian Affairs Minister Monday over his government’s controversial water bill.

APTN National News
Senators grilled the Indian Affairs Minister Tuesda yover his government’s controversial water bill.

Bill S-11 would impose water quality regulations on reserves.

It is being panned by many First Nations leaders, they say there was little consultation before it was tabled.

Under fire, Duncan stood his ground, insisting that many chiefs would rather fight than work with Ottawa.

Author(s)

2 thoughts on “Chiefs would rather fight than work with Ottawa: Duncan

  1. Shortening the AFN document presented to the Senate on Bill S-21 to the barebones, outlining our concerns.nnThe bottomu2010line is we must get it right. nnOur role is to bring together perspectives and to bring forward consensus. This is not consultation. It is facilitation of constructive solutions to urgent problems. nnChief Garrison Settee reminded us of the 1000 homes in northern Manitoba that are without running water.nnGrand Chief Evans is spearu2010heading a campaign about the human right to water. nnElders and Chiefs reflect on the Treaties. nnTheir knowledge that the ancestors advanced Treaties as a means to create viable communities. A fundamental interest like drinking water would have certainly been part of expectations on both sides of the Treaty process. nn1. Financial Issues nnThe Expert Panel on Safe Drinking Water for First Nations said the federal government must close the resource gap and identified this as a precondition: nnIt is not credible to go forward with any regulatory regime without adequate capacity to satisfy the regulatory requirementsnnThe major deficiency in Bill Su201011 is the lack of financial provisions. nnEnsuring safe drinking water is a matter of addressing critical needs; but it is also an important governance matter. nnWe must ensure that First Nation jurisdiction is respected, that effective coordination is in place and that the regime is sustainable, stable regime is sustainable and accountable.

  2. Charles Hill I have taken the liberty of shortening the AFN document presented to the Senate on Bill S-21 to the barebones, outlining their concerns.nnThe bottomu2010line is we must get it right. nnOur role is to bring together perspectives and to bring forward consensus. This is not consultation. It is facilitation of constructive solutions to urgent problems. nnChief Garrison Settee reminded us of the 1000 homes in northern Manitoba that are without running water.nnGrand Chief Evans is spearu2010heading a campaign about the human right to water. nnElders and Chiefs reflect on the Treaties. nnTheir knowledge that the ancestors advanced Treaties as a means to create viable communities. A fundamental interest like drinking water would have certainly been part of expectations on both sides of the Treaty process. nn1. Financial Issues nnThe Expert Panel on Safe Drinking Water for First Nations said the federal government must close the resource gap and identified this as a precondition: nnIt is not credible to go forward with any regulatory regime without adequate capacity to satisfy the regulatory requirementsnnThe major deficiency in Bill Su201011 is the lack of financial provisions. nnEnsuring safe drinking water is a matter of addressing critical needs; but it is also an important governance matter. nnWe must ensure that First Nation jurisdiction is respected, that effective coordination is in place and that the regime is sustainable, stable regime is sustainable and accountable.

Comments are closed.